User talk:Meganslaw

Other account

Megan can you add a link to your old account on your user page for transparency of editong especialy when you make comments like you did on the afddiff. If you dont want to do that you can email me with the user name and I'll indefinitely block that account and you can then refer editors to me to confirm that you have ceased using another account. Gnan garra 17:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have also put this response onto Gnangarra's page: I think I'm just going to quit spending any time on Wikipedia if it involves fending off insulting and completely unfounded suspicions so your suggestion is moot. I do not see how one can assume good faith and simultaneously want control over the person. That,to me, seems like an oxymoron. If there is an assumption of good faith then there is no need for proof or control of the editor's options. Also, pleaase see "Note that alternative accounts are not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of the policies (for example, to double-vote or to increase the apparent support for any given position)." from [1] and there is certainly no indication I was trying to double-vote or increase support for something. In addition, I may wish to revert to the previous user name at some point and why should I have to go through an un-blocking process when I have done nothing wrong? To me it is an important principal that suspicion not be the order of the day on Wikipedia as that is little different from the castration of civil/privacy rights via the argument "if you are not guilty you'll tell us what we want to know". The other problem is that suspicious people can always find another reason to be suspicious. I realize you likely feel it's no big deal for someone to provide information to avoid suspicion but I think it is a big deal. My edits show no grounds for any suspicion whatsoever and as you see, we are allowed to have alternative accounts on this Wiki. However, as I say, I don't like dealing with suspiciousness so I'll say good bye.[[Meganslaw 20:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative accounts arent forbidden, WP:SOCK says If someone uses multiple accounts, it is recommended that he or she provide links between the accounts, so it is easy to determine that they are shared by one individual. all I requested was you link the your accounts or alternatively I'd be willing to quietly block the other account. Gnan garra 00:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I could agree to that, but do you see my point about why I don't like accomodating suspicion? Also I am not really using multiple accounts because I stopped using the other one. If I go along with the block option for the other name, just to make it absolute, what would be required to be unblocked in the future if I want to go back to using that name? Meganslaw 02:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll block with the reason owner requested indef block of self. You'd just log into the account use the {{unblock}} and say owner requests unblock of this account to resume editing. or you can just drop me a note and I'll do when I'm next on. If you want to proceed can you send the request from the account please. Gnan garra 11:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Ahwaz, I do not mind you changing your nickname. It might be a good idea, but you have participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahwaz territory with two socks: Michael2314 (talk · contribs) and Meganslaw (talk · contribs). It constitutes an abusive usage of multiple accounts, so I am blocking you for a week for this. Please do not do it again Alex Bakharev 03:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is, of course, a baseless accusation by Alex Bakharev. This user is not a sockpuppet of me. No check user has been performed and this user has no edits that correlate with my own.--▓▒░الأهواز ★ Al-Ahwaz░▒▓ 23:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]